ix Jacob and Esau. 163 



I shall now endeavour to show that the same 

 conclusion is warranted by the passage in the Epistle 

 to the Eomans (ix. 6 et seq.), which has been so 

 often quoted in favour of the most rigid doctrine of 

 Divine election. It is the only passage where Saint 

 Paul shows any consciousness of moral or meta- 

 physical difficulty arising out of the question of 

 foreordination. It is a digression in the middle 

 of a chapter which begins with a lamentation over 

 the rejection of the Christ by the mass of the people 

 of Israel. He justifies the action of God in per- 

 mitting this, by recalling that the promises of God 

 to the children of Abraham were not to all the 

 children, but only to the chosen ones ; to Isaac and 

 not to Ishmael ; to Jacob and not to Esau. And 

 this election, to use a human mode of speech, is 

 purely arbitrary. " The children being not yet born, 

 neither having done anything good or bad, that the 

 purpose of God according to election might stand, 

 not of works, but of Him that calleth ; it was 

 said, The elder shall serve the younger. 1 Even as 

 it is written, Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated." 2 

 It would be impossible to assert more distinctly 

 the unconditionalness of God's election. But to 

 what were these two brothers respectively elected? 

 There is nothing here about election to any position, 

 good or bad, in the eternal world. Jacob was 

 loved by God, and was elected to be a "prince of 

 God " and an ancestor of David and of Christ. 

 1 Gen. xxv. 23. 2 Mai. i. 2, 3. 



